Hawaii Senate Rejects Expansion Of Marijuana Decriminalization Law, While Broader Legalization Effort Appears Dead For The Year

Hawaii’s Senate has rejected a plan that would have increased the amount of marijuana that a person could possess without risk of criminal charges. Meanwhile separate, broader legislation to legalize and regulate cannabis appears to have stalled for the year.

Senators voted 12–11 against the decriminalization measure, SB 319, from Sen. Joy San Buenaventura (D) on Friday. There was no discussion or debate prior to the floor vote.

Had the measure become law, it would have increased the amount of cannabis decriminalized in Hawaii from the current 3 grams up to 15 grams. Possession of any amount of marijuana up to that 15-gram limit would have been classified as a civil violation, punishable by a fine of $130.

The measure also would have slightly adjusted the amount of possessed marijuana that would qualify as “promoting a detrimental drug in the second degree,” raising it from the current one ounce (28.35 grams) to 30 grams.

Selling or otherwise distributing marijuana would have remained illegal under the plan.

Among the groups who supported the measure were the Community Alliance on Prisons, Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), ACLU of Hawai’i, the Hawai’i Alliance for Cannabis Reform.

ACLU of Hawai’i’s policy director, Carrie Ann Shirota, wrote that the measure would “further reduce the number of unreasonable arrests for cannabis possession in our already bloated criminal justice system” and “reduce targeted enforcement of cannabis laws against specific communities,” such as men under 25 and Native Hawaiians, who are disproportionately arrested under the state’s laws against marijuana possession.

Law enforcement was generally opposed, with the state Department of Law Enforcement testifying, for example, that lowering punishments for possession of nearly a half once of marijuana could inspire “a greater temptation to illegally supply other people.”

The state attorney general’s office, for its part, asked lawmakers to put the decriminalization bill on hold.

“If the eventual goal is the legalization of cannabis,” it said in submitted testimony, “an approach that comprehensively addresses a regulatory scheme to protect the public, support law enforcement, and provide revenue to the State to cover the costs of the negative effects of increased marijuana use would be a preferable way to reach that goal.”

A separate Senate bill that would have legalized marijuana for adults, meanwhile, appears to have stalled for the session. That measure, SB 1613, has yet to make it out of its current committee despite an end-of-week legislative deadline.

While advocates feel there’s sufficient support for the legalization proposal in the Senate, it’s widely believed that House lawmakers would ultimately scuttle the measure, as they did earlier this month with a legalization companion bill, HB 1246.

Some observers pointed out that there may still be legislative maneuvers available to revive the Senate legalization bill this session, though it’s unclear whether lawmakers will pursue them.

Last session, a Senate-passed legalization bill also fizzled out in the House.

If enacted, the latest legalization proposal would have established the Hawaii Cannabis and Hemp Office, which would have overseen adult-use cannabis, medical marijuana and hemp businesses. Adults 21 and older would be able to possess up to an ounce of marijuana and five grams of cannabis concentrate, and they could also have grown limited amounts of marijuana at home for personal use.

The House vote to stall the bill came just days after approval from a pair of committees at a joint hearing. Ahead of that hearing, the panels received nearly 300 pages of testimony, including from state agencies, advocacy organizations and members of the public.

Here’s what the legalization legislation, HB 1246 / SB 1613, had proposed:

• Establish the Hawaii Cannabis and Hemp Office, which would regulate adult-use cannabis, medical marijuana and hemp businesses. The office would be housed within the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and charged with prioritizing public health and safety.
• Regulators would promulgate rules for the state cannabis system, license businesses, register patients, maintain a seed-to-sale tracking system and publish studies and reports on various elements of the program.
• Interim rules would be due by December 31, 2025, with final rules to be adopted by December 31, 2030.
• An 11-person advisory board would study issues around federal law, patient access, equity and other matters, making recommendations to lawmakers and regulators. Members would include representatives of the hemp and marijuana industries, agriculture, public health and safety, Native Hawaiian culture, mental health and substance abuse treatment.
• As of January 1, 2026, adults 21 and older could possess up to an ounce of marijuana and five grams of cannabis concentrate.
• As of January 1, 2026, adults could also grow up to six plants for personal use and store up to 10 ounces of homegrown cannabis in their residence. Households with multiple adults would be limited to a total of 10 plants and two pounds of homegrown cannabis.
• Sales of adult-use cannabis would be taxed at 14 percent, while the medical marijuana tax rate would remain at 4 percent.
• After the costs of administering the program, 30 percent of state revenue would go to a social equity grants program. A public health and education grants program would receive 10 percent, as would a separate public safety grant program. Five percent each would go to a hemp grants program, to counties, to the attorney general’s office for nuisance abatement and to counter money laundering and organized crime.
• Synthetic or “artificially derived” cannabinoid products would be restricted.
• Edibles could not resemble candy or other products aimed at children, nor could they look like people, animals, fruit or cartoons.
• Packaging could not include graphics, pictures or multiple colors. Medical marijuana specifically would need to be in white packaging.
• Labels would need to include a universal cannabis symbol.
• Cultivation could not occur in federal public housing, shelters, on-campus housing or hotels, among other locations, and it could be prohibited by landlords and homeowners associations.
• Landlords could prohibit smoking or vaping marijuana but in general could not ban people from possessing non-inhaled cannabis products.
• Smoking marijuana in public would be a civil violation, with penalties of up to $130 or 10 hours of community service
• Driving under the influence of marijuana would remain a crime. A new penalty would also punish a passenger found smoking or vaping with a petty misdemeanor, carrying a fine of up to $2,000.
• Unless kept in a vehicle’s trunk or other place out of reach of the driver, an open container would be punished by a fine of up to $130 or up to 10 hours of community service.
• Selling cannabis to minors would be a misdemeanor.
• Diverting marijuana from a licensed business to the unregulated market would be a Class C felony.
• Unlicensed extraction of cannabis using butane would be a Class C felony.
• Minors possessing up to five grams of cannabis concentrate could be charged with a petty misdemeanor, as could adults in possession of more than five grams of concentrate.
• State and local government employees in general could not be fired for using medical or adult-use cannabis away from work or for testing positive marijuana metabolites. Employees subject to federal requirements would not qualify for such protections, and exceptions could apply in the case of collective bargaining agreements.
• Regulators would license cultivators, processors, retailers, smaller-scale craft dispensaries and independent testing laboratories. Craft dispensaries could sell only their own cannabis products.
• The first round of licenses under the law would be issued by July 1, 2026, though dual-use licenses allowing medical marijuana businesses to serve adult-use customers would be issued by January 1, 2026.
• Licenses would be awarded based on a randomized lottery provided applicants meet certain minimum standards and qualifications. Participation by small businesses, Indigenous farmers and people from areas disproportionately impacted by the drug ware would be encouraged.
• No person could have an interest in more than nine licenses, up to three per license class.
• People with an interest in an independent testing lab could not have an interest in any other cannabis business.
• People with an interest in a small-scale cooperative or craft dispensary could not have an interest in a business of any other license type.
• All license applicants would need to be residents of Hawaii for at least five years and could not have any felony convictions other than for cannabis-related offenses, pardoned or expunged offenses or sentences completed more than 10 years earlier.
• Regulators could craft rules to allow special event permits, social consumption and certain other activities.
• Medical marijuana dispensaries could transition to dual-use (medical and recreational) retail facilities. Conversion would cost $50,000 per retail location and $25,000 for each production facility.
• State-registered patients and caregivers could possess up to four ounces of marijuana. They could also grow up to 10 plants and possess up to a pound each of homegrown cannabis for personal use, with a maximum of two pounds per household.
• State regulators would license medical marijuana co-ops of up to five patients.
• Regulations would include rules around security, health and safety, advertising and labeling, energy and environmental standards, employee training and various other matters.
• All employees of cannabis businesses would need to be at least 21 years of age. No one under 21 could enter retail stores.
• Businesses would need to be at least 750 feet from schools, parks and public housing complexes.
• Cultivators would be limited to 3,500 square feet of indoor canopy space and 5,000 square feet of outdoor grow space.
• Handouts would need to be included with all sold products. They would need to include a variety of information, including instructions, warnings about safe use, potential adverse effects and the status of federal law—including how the conflict with federal prohibition impacts gun rights, employment and other rights and benefits.
• Pesticide use on cannabis products would be regulated by the state Department of Agriculture.
• Hemp businesses could sell cured cannabis flower provided it meets U.S. Department of Agriculture compliance standards and state rules around testing, packaging and labeling.
• Aerosol hemp sprays would be prohibited.
• Hemp cultivation would be prohibited within 300 feet of schools, childcare centers or playgrounds and could also not be within 100 feet of a residence not owned by the licensee.
• With regard to hemp, regulators could prohibit specific cannabinoid products. Hemp tinctures could contain no more than 30 milligrams of THC per package and could only be sold to adults 21 and older.
• A social equity grants program would assist applicants who’d resided in a disproportionately impacted area for at least five of the past 10 years or businesses with more than half of employees residing in a disproportionately impacted area.
• “Disproportionately impacted area” would refer to areas of persistent poverty, medically underserved communities, and historically disadvantaged communities as determined by regulators.
• Equity applicants would qualify for a 50 percent discount on application and licensing fees for their first five years of operation.
• Equity grants would include financial assistance, technical support and training.
• Funding would also go to community-based organizations to support childcare and youth programs.
• Regulators would hire contractors to develop a public health and education campaign beginning later this year.
• A public health and grant program would award funds to community-based organizations for a variety of health and education programs.
• A separate public safety grant program would award funds to state and county agencies for law enforcement, crisis intervention, and enforcement of nuisance abatement laws, among others initiatives.
• A hemp grant program would assist smaller cultivators with industry training, technical assistance and market research projects.
• Marijuana businesses could deduct business expenses on their state taxes, even though similar deductions remain prohibited at the federal level.

Groups that formally opposed the measures in public testimony included law enforcement—such as the Honolulu Police Department and the prosecuting attorneys’ offices in Honolulu and Maui—as well as anti-drug groups, including the Hawaii Substance Abuse Coalition and the Hawai’i Family Forum.

Some others, such as the Hawaiian Islands Republican Women, said they support the medical use of marijuana but not its nonmedical use.

Lawmakers on the Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs attended an informational briefing on the bill last month. Much of the roughly two-hour event consisted of presentations from legalization advocates, regulatory experts and industry and community representatives. They gave lawmakers an overview of state-level legalization in the U.S. and spoke to how the Hawaii proposal built on lessons learned in other states.

Separately in Hawaii, the House Committee on Labor last month unanimously voted to advance legislation that would protect state-registered medical marijuana patients from discrimination in the workplace. That bill, HB 325, has not yet been taken up in the Senate.

If it were to become law, the proposal would prevent employers from using a person’s status as a medical marijuana cardholder against them when making hiring, firing or other employment-related decisions, with some limitations. It would also bar discrimination based on a registered patient’s positive drug test for cannabis or metabolites provided the person is not impaired on the job.

The protections would apply to both public and private employees, though it would not extend to law enforcement or corrections workers, state and county firefighters, emergency medical workers, lifeguards or swim instructors, people who carry firearms on the job, people who operate vehicles or heavy machinery, emergency management workers, people who work with children or the elderly or people who administer controlled substances, among other carveouts.

Employers could also discriminate against medical marijuana patients if “a failure to do so would cause the employer to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under a contract or federal law.”

This past fall, regulators solicited proposals to assess the state’s current medical marijuana program—and also sought to estimate demand for recreational sales if the state eventually moves forward with adult-use legalization. Some read the move as a sign the regulatory agency saw a need to prepare to the potential reform.

Hawaii was the first U.S. state to legalize medical marijuana through its legislature, passing a law in 2000.